When voting in districts, all candidates must run for winning a single seat. Each candidate must pull out every trick on the book to get close to winning. And that means that having people or companies contribute money helps a candidate getting a better chance for that one seat. But it also means our candidates have more than one agenda. Now, Oakland citizens want to take money out of our democracy, and put Proportional Voting in place — the democratic system that is less prone to financial dominance.

Oakland citizens signed a petition that was sent to the Election Compliance Services and the Public Ethics Commission. Because the current system leads too much to a political monopoly in cities and counties all across the nation, these eligible voters are requesting voter equality as guaranteed in the United States constitution for cities and counties. Voters are requesting the change from winner-takes-all to elections of "a single vote for a single candidate in a single election for the entire council" in their city of Oakland.

Requesting this change based on the 14th Amendment may lead to all cities and counties in the nation having to follow suit and provide proportional elections, because that is what the Constitution delivers us. Just by looking at the words winner-takes-all, we can all see without a doubt that our electoral system is not equality based. Requesting local governments to provide us proportional elections is the first step. The Constitution says we should have proportional elections, because no other system ensures equality before the law.

For other people — who also want their local electoral system be changed into one that delivers proportionality — this may be a turning point for their electoral system. But it is important to send your Elections Commission a request to change the local electoral system yourself, too. Read below how to make such a request.

In this image one can see how inequality increases dramatically by adding just one more governmental layer that functions on a premise of winner-takes-all, a system that does not subscribe to equality. According to our knowledge of the Constitution, the image to the left represents what is described in the Constitution: first a straight line of equality before the law, and next the depression of this line by the Federal and State levels that function according to lower standards. Some inequality is therefore included in the Constitution itself, but the Constitution does not provide wording that allows the additional depression of our equality at the local levels of City and County.

Voters would come out to vote more often if the minimum odd of you picking your representative was 88.89%, and not just 50.01% for all voters. In this image of Oakland with eight seats you can see the minimum guarantee of each system, and how much better your vote translates into your representative in proportional elections than in today's system. We bet you would come to the polls when it counts — just like other people in nations that already have proportional elections.

Two Different Democracies

The system to the left is the one we use to
select our representatives, and while it may be strong in some respects, it delivers
tell-tale shortfalls in many other specific fields that do get addressed in nations using the system of Proportional Voting to the right; we therefore invite
you to join us in making our politicians work for all of us again. Proportional elections in specific make equality go hand in hand with our own democratic ideals, while taking money out of the democratic progress. Many of us, and not just the more outspoken parts of our nation
but also the silent majority, have voiced dissatisfaction with the
political outcomes  even when our own candidates won the elections!
Many people realize that, despite the world famous economic freedoms
of the United States, we are stuck in a political two-dimensional
system with a limited choice.
Just red and blue may appear colorful and special together, but just two colors never deliver the
real full-color prints.

What happened so far?

This far, the City of Oakland has not done much with the voter request before them. Despite further efforts from our side to friendly educate the Election Compliance Services and the Public Ethics Commission, you can read for yourself that they disavow their responsibility to uphold the United States constitution by purposefully reading something different in our request. This means no action is taken by anyone in the City of Oakland to ensure this city complies with the United States constitution. Only the freedoms of the local legislation is stressed, no inquiry whether the city remained within the larger U.S. framework was made. The whole sequence of communication with the City of Oakland: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H.

As you can read about the reaction from the City and County of San Francisco, the answer from them is not completely identical, but the message may ultimately be considered identical.

Each person is free to copy the letter shown below, sign it or have it signed by eligible voters in your City or County. Then, sent it out addressed to your local Electoral Department. It may be good to know that the request is not based on any person asking. Rather, it is based on the right given to us in the Constitution of equality before the law, while no prescription is given in the Constitution that allows officials to refuse delivering such system of proportionality at the local level.

The Document:

And yes, if you live in another place, just copy the letter, sign it, and send it to your Electoral Department! Also, if you haven't heard about this in the news, you will understand how important it is to spread the news to your friends! Let them know that you value them as equal as yourself before the law.